New Somerville falafel place

[cos]

Eater Boston writes about "More Falafel Coming to Somerville" - a story they picked up from here:

"A now-deleted post in the Davis Square Livejournal community recently showed an awning with the new business name on it, asking if folks knew more about the venture. According to an agenda from August, the Somerville Licensing Commission heard from Albana Rami to grant a common victualler's license for the establishment at 1 Main St., and the new signage suggests it is coming soon."

Since that post is now gone, might as well bring this one back around.

Comments

[ruthling.livejournal.com]

why was that post deleted?

[ckd]

Huge photo with no lj-cut; the mods asked the poster to fix it or the post would be removed, and presumably the fix didn't happen.

Falafel intolerance. That has to be it.

[rosiewoodboat.livejournal.com]

The moderator doesn't enjoy the falafel, apparently.

moderator note

[ron_newman]

Yes, I gave the original poster until 9 am to either add an lj-cut or make the huge photo much smaller. The deadline passed, so I deleted the post.

heavy handed?

[scott gunther (from livejournal.com)]

Sometimes it seems like the moderating is a little heavy handed here. Is there a way the mods could have done something to make the photo smaller or add an lj-cut (whatever that is)?

RE: heavy handed?

[antimony.livejournal.com]

Mods can't edit posts, only delete. It's how the technology works.

And for users still using livejournal outside of reading davis_square, large images like that can break our ability to read our friends' lists fairly badly, depending on individual settings. (I personally have images blocked on my feed, so it didn't break mine.)

[leafshimmer.livejournal.com]

I personally appreciate the Mod's prompt action, given that the OP wasn't responding. The giant photo was wreaking havoc with my Friends page.

RE: heavy handed?

[londo.livejournal.com]

I find the mods don't have to step in very often, though it *is* a shame that LJ doesn't have better tools for this sort of thing.

On the plus side, every time someone comments on a post, you get an email notification with the full text of the post, so re-creating it with a smaller image and/or a cut is pretty easy.

[jbsegal.livejournal.com]

"Albana Rami"?
Any guesses on whether it's the same Rami as http://ramisboston.com/ ?

RE: heavy handed?

[ron_newman]

I wish I could edit posts that way, but I can't. LJ does not let anyone other than the original poster edit a post.

For the record, the deleted post was by ext_2353487 (Jad Atoui) and it contained this photo, which is 2048 x 1152 pixels. Here's a very temporary Google cache of the deleted post, which will probably disappear within a day or two.

RE: heavy handed?

[teko.livejournal.com]

Ron set a deadline after several people complained about the huge photo and asked the OP to add an lj-cut (which is a single line of code that would have put the photo on its own page rather than on the homepage of DS LJ). The OP didn't do either one, so the post was deleted.

[slinkr.livejournal.com]

Almost certainly not related. The Brookline Rami's owner's first name is Rami.

Re: heavy handed?

[prunesnprisms.livejournal.com]

Yeah, no, there is nothing anyone can do but the original poster. If they don't respond, well, that kinda sucks for everyone.

RE: heavy handed?

[ron_newman]

This FAQ answers the question "What is an lj-cut?" and explains how to use one.

Our community rules have required using lj-cut for large photos since long before I became a moderator here.

RE: heavy handed?

[foxgloved.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I can't navigate my friends' page when there are huge images blocking the sidebar. I appreciate a quick response.

RE: moderator note

[unferth.livejournal.com]

I'm just one voice, but I think you did the right thing. Huge images without a cut don't fit the community's standards. Ideally the original poster would have put the image behind an LJ cut (and maybe resized it, it would have been perfectly legible at at least 1/4 the resolution) but with the original poster not responding deletion was the most appropriate choice.